Add Datadog UDS support #123
Conversation
| return | ||
| } | ||
| defer f.Close() | ||
| func bufSizeFromFD(f *os.File, sizehint int) (bufsize int, err error) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i would need an expert eye on this, i used the same existing logic against UDP for Unix socket too. I think that is right but i am not 100% sure. if not i can make this only for UDP?
| if err != nil { | ||
| log.Printf("stats/datadog: %s", err) | ||
| log.Printf("stats/datadog: unable to create writer %s", err) | ||
| c.err = err |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ideally i would return an error to the caller of NewClientWith if we can not create a writer, but decided to not change the API
| newBufSize, err := w.CalcBufferSize(config.BufferSize) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| log.Printf("stats/datadog: unable to calc writer's buffer size. Defaulting to a buffer of size %d - %v\n", DefaultBufferSize, err) | ||
| newBufSize = DefaultBufferSize |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure if we prefer seting newBufSize to 0 (existing behaviour)? i am open for suggestion
|
is it possible to get someone to review this at all? |
|
We have been using UDS support in production (this PR) for more than 6 months at mx51 it definitely helped us to better manage datadog agent maintenance and go apps reconnecting automatically to it. Something that UDP caused us trouble in the past. |
I tried updating #123 with ~50 commits but the diff got too messy. Easier to just add the changes on a new commit.
Goal
Adds Support for connecting to datadog via Unix Domain socket (UDS) instead of UDP
Why
UDS could be useful :
Taken from https://docs.datadoghq.com/developers/dogstatsd/unix_socket/?tab=host ^
Usage to connect to
unixgramsocket instead ofudpinstead of
What
I hope this PR could be useful, completely open for feedbacks to align this PR to the conventions/style of this library. I gave it a first shot.
I inlined comments/questions
Credit
Datadog official client lib , i inspired a lot the code from it.